In this political back-to-school period where everyone is honing their weapons and beginning to prepare for the European elections, the word “clarification” is often heard in the debate.
This word, which has taken on a magical meaning, signifies nothing other than the political positioning that each party, movement, or leader will have to adopt during the upcoming spring vote, which will determine what kind of Europe the citizen-voters will choose: a European Union with reinforced integration or Europe of Nations.
On one side, there are the “progressives” leaning towards federalism, and on the other, the national-populists who are pushing a transnational project aiming to assert a majoritarian identity sovereignty.
The social democrats, the liberals, and the greens will support the first option.
The position of the communists is a little more confused, as is that of France’s Insoumise party.
Far-right parties (Europe of Liberties and Nations) will form a transnational group, behind which one can glimpse the Eurasian strategy of the Putinist circles, such as the Izborsk Club, and the movement by American political strategist Steve Bannon.
Their project aims to fracture the European Union and weaken it, reducing it to a vast free-trade area rather than a community of values as provided for by the Treaty of Rome in its constitution.
It remains to define the choice of the national parties making up the European People’s Party, who until now are convinced Europeans participating in the management of the European community within its governing bodies, commission, and parliament – being the largest group in the chamber.
The recent rise to power of heads of governments (in Hungary, Poland, more recently in Italy) espousing “illiberal” democracy has changed the game: hesitations have taken place, and ambiguous situations have emerged, the most recent being the sanction vote in the European Parliament against Hungary for non-compliance with the principles of Article 7 of the European Charter (rights violations), during which the group was divided: 60% for, 40% against.
Even more grotesque was the behavior of the deputies of Les Républicains who adhere to the PPE: 3 voted against, 2 did not participate in the vote, and others voted for or abstained!!!
To denounce this contradiction, the National Rally – which has always chosen the national-populist identity line – organized a meeting of its members (with an attendance of nearly 200 people) this weekend, attended by two European deputies, Marie-Christine Arnautu and Nicolas Bay, the head of its group in Strasbourg and a leading figure of the party.
The theme title “The Lies of Les Républicains” was intended to be read in the European perspective but how to resist a local application?
This was undertaken by the regional councilor and number one from Nice, Philippe Vardon. With an imposing rugby player’s physique (first row), the elected official made a “virile” entry into the scrum by defining Eric Ciotti, considered a supporter of the very right-wing line within the confused galaxy of the so-called republican right, “with hard words and a soft hand,” accusing him of “constantly yielding to the moral left” when it comes to turning words into actions.
In fact, the MP from Nice remains faithful to the strategy that succeeded for Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007: say what the FN (at the time) does, but do not ally with them. Hence, his recent anathema to exclude from the party “those who will lean towards the RN,” while continuing to adopt the same positions as Marine Le Pen’s party.
Marie-Christine Arnautu gave her speech a more intellectual angle: “our PPE colleagues tell us that what separates us are the … republican values.” But which values are more republican than defending the Nation, the people, our identities against the ideology of immigration, societal liberalism, global free trade? – she asked before concluding by stating that “the right must no longer bow down” and calling on right-wing elected officials to join the National Rally, the only sovereignist party.
Finally, Nicolas Bay – a likely future lead candidate in the 2019 European elections – spoke about the political battle around ideas and values with vigilance and determination.
During his lengthy intervention, he lashed out at both right and left, vehemently stigmatizing the double language of LR who “say one thing in Paris and vote another in Strasbourg or Brussels.”
His conclusion could only be an auspice: to achieve in the next electoral consultation, a strong affirmation of the transnational grouping of the “extreme” right to prevent the formation of the traditional majority (social democrats, liberals, populists) in the future parliament to block the planned reforms aimed at providing more integration to the governance of the institutions and, on the contrary, to return to forms of sovereigntism.
In 9 months, we will know what the voters have chosen. Until then, everyone will weave their web!
